Jürgen Hubert
First Post
Read Machiavelli's "The Prince". That should give you plenty of ideas...
DM's Request: How to run politics?
- Thread starter FungiMuncher
- Start date
Dr. Strangemonkey
First Post
For the time period you are running in there are some great political histories written during the time period that I can recommend.
Anna Comnena's Alexiad is fantastic and easy to read. Find it in penguin at any decent college bookstore.
Someone with a classical or medieval background could help me out here, but there was a Justinian author, Procopius?, who wrote two histories of the time period, one public and one pubic but called secret.
For playing out a political campaign I would echo Piratecat's recommendations and add two suggestions.
First, I highly recommend surrounding powerful factions and figure with lots of lower profile NPCs. Think of West Wing. These characters can become really nice assets or opponents for the PCs. In a political situation a secretary can kill you just as surely as the guard can. And it makes for the nastiest sort of politics.
In line with this I now keep a running notebook of NPCs for my campaign. Everyone who isn't instantly going to die gets a name and I make certain that they are persistent and that many of them move to recontact the PCs at various points. This has made the PCs a lot more attentive to people and how they are percieved.
Second, very important to start making reputation and artifacts of reputation an important part of gameplay. In a larger issue this is just a question of ettiquette and getting invited to the right parties for the pcs and for the DM it is a question of getting people to react to them as political figures. Giving them advice, going to their parties, and looking to them for patronage.
In a specific sense, this often involves a new type of story reward. Issues involving the right type of clothing or weapon or loot for people of the proper rank are critical to the politics of the period you are discussing. When the PCs get a boost in official political status they need to understand the ramifications of not wearing the right clothes. People in pre-modern politics don't know what the king looks like, but they know what a crown means. People who work for the king know what both look like and tend to be really paranoid about anyone who seems to be imitating a higher rank.
There are military expeditions set up in the Alexiad against claimants to the throne and the missions are often a success of the claimant is deprived of his purple robe and paraphenalia.
Anna Comnena's Alexiad is fantastic and easy to read. Find it in penguin at any decent college bookstore.
Someone with a classical or medieval background could help me out here, but there was a Justinian author, Procopius?, who wrote two histories of the time period, one public and one pubic but called secret.
For playing out a political campaign I would echo Piratecat's recommendations and add two suggestions.
First, I highly recommend surrounding powerful factions and figure with lots of lower profile NPCs. Think of West Wing. These characters can become really nice assets or opponents for the PCs. In a political situation a secretary can kill you just as surely as the guard can. And it makes for the nastiest sort of politics.
In line with this I now keep a running notebook of NPCs for my campaign. Everyone who isn't instantly going to die gets a name and I make certain that they are persistent and that many of them move to recontact the PCs at various points. This has made the PCs a lot more attentive to people and how they are percieved.
Second, very important to start making reputation and artifacts of reputation an important part of gameplay. In a larger issue this is just a question of ettiquette and getting invited to the right parties for the pcs and for the DM it is a question of getting people to react to them as political figures. Giving them advice, going to their parties, and looking to them for patronage.
In a specific sense, this often involves a new type of story reward. Issues involving the right type of clothing or weapon or loot for people of the proper rank are critical to the politics of the period you are discussing. When the PCs get a boost in official political status they need to understand the ramifications of not wearing the right clothes. People in pre-modern politics don't know what the king looks like, but they know what a crown means. People who work for the king know what both look like and tend to be really paranoid about anyone who seems to be imitating a higher rank.
There are military expeditions set up in the Alexiad against claimants to the throne and the missions are often a success of the claimant is deprived of his purple robe and paraphenalia.
Also, it's important to keep in mind the ultimate balance of the huge power that monarchs and nobles may wield.
Some of them include the slowness of the execution of their plans. If a noble wants to harm or kill another noble without being blatently obvious about it ("bloodying his hands") he will have to go through numerous well guarded and well paid channels and proxies to do it. If a king wishes to go to war, he better start planning months and months prior to it, or he'll lose.
Also, there's a limitation of scope- monarchs often do not see the big picture. Often they do not see at all. They rely on council, be it mundane word of mouth or secretive mages- and all of their councilors and attendants have their own motivations and their own connections as well.
The list goes on and on, but the final one can even be hereditary... Monarchs, unless well trained or Arthurian in the campaign style, are not natural kings. Without training they will be poor leaders and administrators, so a key aspect of your nobles may reside in what schools of learning they have taken tutelage from. Knowledge of history, art, literature, philosophy, and combat all become very powerful.
Looking at all of this, it's easy to see how adventurers can become the wild cards for nobility- a blessing or a curse depending on how they are used and funded. Finally, of most important note it is critical that the political game is played with one key rule- nothing goes exactly as according to plan.
definitely recommend R.R. Martin as a read to see how unaware rulers are, and how uncontrollable the courts truly are.
Some of them include the slowness of the execution of their plans. If a noble wants to harm or kill another noble without being blatently obvious about it ("bloodying his hands") he will have to go through numerous well guarded and well paid channels and proxies to do it. If a king wishes to go to war, he better start planning months and months prior to it, or he'll lose.
Also, there's a limitation of scope- monarchs often do not see the big picture. Often they do not see at all. They rely on council, be it mundane word of mouth or secretive mages- and all of their councilors and attendants have their own motivations and their own connections as well.
The list goes on and on, but the final one can even be hereditary... Monarchs, unless well trained or Arthurian in the campaign style, are not natural kings. Without training they will be poor leaders and administrators, so a key aspect of your nobles may reside in what schools of learning they have taken tutelage from. Knowledge of history, art, literature, philosophy, and combat all become very powerful.
Looking at all of this, it's easy to see how adventurers can become the wild cards for nobility- a blessing or a curse depending on how they are used and funded. Finally, of most important note it is critical that the political game is played with one key rule- nothing goes exactly as according to plan.
definitely recommend R.R. Martin as a read to see how unaware rulers are, and how uncontrollable the courts truly are.
Drusilia Nailo
First Post
I think that it's important to remember that politics are often, and usually, sneaky -- which means that the characters aren't always going to know the consequences of their interactions with NPCs, at least, not right away.
Inadvertently insulting a nobleman, for example, does not have to result in the nobleman calling the characters out for a duel. The insulted noble could do many things to his new enemies, anything from dropping a quiet word into the ear of the king, that these unsavory individuals should not be trusted, to working behind the scenes, trying to frame them for a murder of another of his enemies. (Ridding himself of two sets of enemies instead of just one.)
It also helps to remember that the NPCs all have plans, as has been stated earlier in the thread, that they will be trying to accomplish. If the characters do nothing to stop those plans, even if they show no interest in finding out what is going on, the plans should continue to unfold, unnoticed, in the background. The PCs may well have to deal with the consequences later. That, in my experience, keeps the game feeling more real, instead of having things happen only when the characters are around.
I hope my ideas were helpful! I'll be interested to see how it turns out for you.
Inadvertently insulting a nobleman, for example, does not have to result in the nobleman calling the characters out for a duel. The insulted noble could do many things to his new enemies, anything from dropping a quiet word into the ear of the king, that these unsavory individuals should not be trusted, to working behind the scenes, trying to frame them for a murder of another of his enemies. (Ridding himself of two sets of enemies instead of just one.)
It also helps to remember that the NPCs all have plans, as has been stated earlier in the thread, that they will be trying to accomplish. If the characters do nothing to stop those plans, even if they show no interest in finding out what is going on, the plans should continue to unfold, unnoticed, in the background. The PCs may well have to deal with the consequences later. That, in my experience, keeps the game feeling more real, instead of having things happen only when the characters are around.
I hope my ideas were helpful! I'll be interested to see how it turns out for you.
s/LaSH
First Post
My take on politics:
Factions with goals, often mutually exclusive. And factions within factions. People who are supposed to be protecting the realm will be more concerned with other people protecting the realm, often to the realm's detriment. A wise politician does his job; a foolish politician plays politics. I'd suggest a mixture of wise and foolish, and let that dictate some of your factional goals. It's really how far afield you look. The petty politicians are more concerned about the man in the office next door; the better politicians are concerned about the enormous army massing on the border.
At least, that's how my observations of real-world politics go. The nasty bit is, the wise politician is too often toppled by the petty politician simply because it was such a stupid thing to do that the wise one never considered it might happen. The really wise politician becomes petty for survival's sake.
A quick example would be a league of kingdoms; the kings should look out for all kingdoms, but petty kings will screw their neighbour for a quick buck. Each king has a number of dukes, councilors, courtiers etc; they all have jobs and staff of their own, which are supposed to help them run the country, but petty councilors will simply try to push other people away from the King's ear so their voice is loudest. You get the idea; it's a situation that could be a whole lot better than it is.
Factions with goals, often mutually exclusive. And factions within factions. People who are supposed to be protecting the realm will be more concerned with other people protecting the realm, often to the realm's detriment. A wise politician does his job; a foolish politician plays politics. I'd suggest a mixture of wise and foolish, and let that dictate some of your factional goals. It's really how far afield you look. The petty politicians are more concerned about the man in the office next door; the better politicians are concerned about the enormous army massing on the border.
At least, that's how my observations of real-world politics go. The nasty bit is, the wise politician is too often toppled by the petty politician simply because it was such a stupid thing to do that the wise one never considered it might happen. The really wise politician becomes petty for survival's sake.
A quick example would be a league of kingdoms; the kings should look out for all kingdoms, but petty kings will screw their neighbour for a quick buck. Each king has a number of dukes, councilors, courtiers etc; they all have jobs and staff of their own, which are supposed to help them run the country, but petty councilors will simply try to push other people away from the King's ear so their voice is loudest. You get the idea; it's a situation that could be a whole lot better than it is.
FungiMuncher
First Post
Hey, everyone, these are great ideas! Keep 'em coming! Those little details are the bits that I really have no clue about. That stuff is really helpful.
Drawmac, I do indeed have Freeport: City of Adventure. I'm thinking that the rouge who stole the artifact could tie into the history of the Drac family described in that book (perhaps even being this world's original Captain Drac). Freeport even has serpentmen, but I'm not sure I want them to figure prominately in this town.
Spacecrime, yeah, I wish DYNASTIES AND DEMAGOGUES was out now! It'll be a definite buy.
I thinking that Piratecat's mention of merchant families is about the scope I'd like to take here. In the town, there would be a governor from the empire, and maybe an admiral. I don't think I want to deal with toppling kingdoms, at least yet!
Wow, I have a lot of ideas running through my head now, but it's getting late. If anyone's interested, I'll post what I come up with later (sure could use the feedback).
take care,
FungiMuncher
Drawmac, I do indeed have Freeport: City of Adventure. I'm thinking that the rouge who stole the artifact could tie into the history of the Drac family described in that book (perhaps even being this world's original Captain Drac). Freeport even has serpentmen, but I'm not sure I want them to figure prominately in this town.
Spacecrime, yeah, I wish DYNASTIES AND DEMAGOGUES was out now! It'll be a definite buy.
I thinking that Piratecat's mention of merchant families is about the scope I'd like to take here. In the town, there would be a governor from the empire, and maybe an admiral. I don't think I want to deal with toppling kingdoms, at least yet!
Wow, I have a lot of ideas running through my head now, but it's getting late. If anyone's interested, I'll post what I come up with later (sure could use the feedback).
take care,
FungiMuncher
Azzemmell
First Post
Couple points:
First, to run a politics campaign you should have very organized notes. At least for me, I've found that keeping track of who hates/admires/underestimates who is crucial to knowing what is going to happen if the PCs take a course of action you hadn't anticipated.
It (taking good notes) is also helpfull in gauging how deep or broad the PCs knowledge of the TRUE situation is, being that politics, as mentioned, is so often multilayered.
Also, if magic is at the default level of power (as the PHB). Scrying can take on a HUGE importance, as well as ways of protecting against such tactics. Wizards, or those who have these abilities, will be in high demand as whoever employes one will have a strong advantage over those who don't.
I love running games with politics in them, it's great fun to see the furrowed brows of my players as they try to figure out who they can really trust and who might be behind the attempt on their lives just last night. (sinister laugh)
First, to run a politics campaign you should have very organized notes. At least for me, I've found that keeping track of who hates/admires/underestimates who is crucial to knowing what is going to happen if the PCs take a course of action you hadn't anticipated.
It (taking good notes) is also helpfull in gauging how deep or broad the PCs knowledge of the TRUE situation is, being that politics, as mentioned, is so often multilayered.
Also, if magic is at the default level of power (as the PHB). Scrying can take on a HUGE importance, as well as ways of protecting against such tactics. Wizards, or those who have these abilities, will be in high demand as whoever employes one will have a strong advantage over those who don't.
I love running games with politics in them, it's great fun to see the furrowed brows of my players as they try to figure out who they can really trust and who might be behind the attempt on their lives just last night. (sinister laugh)
I think the key to politics is making sure that the heroes can't just run in and kill the bad guy. That evil mastermind behind the throne may be evil, but the king certainly thinks he's a great advisor and would be very angry if the heroes just killed him. It is feasible to see the king's guards defending the evil mastermind even though as soon as they're done he's going to figure out a way to get past them and kill the king. That sort of conflict is vital to the genre.
For a great example, look at the Three Musketeers (the disney movie). The Cardinal is clearly evil but at first the king doesn't realize it. Only through the urging of his queen, an assassination attempt, and the Three Musketeers breaking out a letter that the Cardinal wrote about a secret peace treaty with England (who the king was about to go to war with) does the king finally realize that the Cardinal is truly an evil man.
Another way to carry this idea out is through the extensive use of minions. Minions of other minions. Minions of those minion's minions. The key is to make sure that its hard to trace a murder back to the high priest of the temple who recently lost a lot of power because the new Prime Minister followed Pelor instead of Nerull. The plot should twist and turn constantly and the heroes should never have everything figured out until the end (or at least, shouldn't be able to do anything because of the situation).
Hope some of this helps.
For a great example, look at the Three Musketeers (the disney movie). The Cardinal is clearly evil but at first the king doesn't realize it. Only through the urging of his queen, an assassination attempt, and the Three Musketeers breaking out a letter that the Cardinal wrote about a secret peace treaty with England (who the king was about to go to war with) does the king finally realize that the Cardinal is truly an evil man.
Another way to carry this idea out is through the extensive use of minions. Minions of other minions. Minions of those minion's minions. The key is to make sure that its hard to trace a murder back to the high priest of the temple who recently lost a lot of power because the new Prime Minister followed Pelor instead of Nerull. The plot should twist and turn constantly and the heroes should never have everything figured out until the end (or at least, shouldn't be able to do anything because of the situation).
Hope some of this helps.
If the setting is quasi-historical Byzantium, the centre of power stems from the Emperor principally (who would be regarded as virtually God), with two major routes for advancement: the military or the bureaucracy.
The former, which I assume that the PCs belong to (in at least a semi-real sense) would be more meritocratic than the latter, but there is still a very strong element of patronage. Advancement was at least strongly dependent on who you knew, not what you knew. There was also a near fanatical religious fervour which led to vast religious buildings (e.g. Hagia Sophia) and an incredible dependence on daily ritual.
Politics would likely revolve around trying to impress those people in power without upsetting others, and without building too many rivalries. A single solid gesture could net a high office, a single panegyric could gather a senatorial post but conversely calamitous falls could occur. The death of an emperor could sweep away all the old favourites (usually via execution).
At the lower-levels, the PCs would be mainly interested in getting a solid and reliable patron and then trying to advance with his help, without becoming too reliant upon him. Through the middle-levels, the PCs will have to look both ways: both at seeking advancement and gaining more influential patrons, yet looking over their shoulder to prevent ambitious climbers from toppling them. At the higher-levels, the PCs may deal with the Imperial Court directly, and would be more interested in gathering clients to propagate their power. Just a few ideas.
The former, which I assume that the PCs belong to (in at least a semi-real sense) would be more meritocratic than the latter, but there is still a very strong element of patronage. Advancement was at least strongly dependent on who you knew, not what you knew. There was also a near fanatical religious fervour which led to vast religious buildings (e.g. Hagia Sophia) and an incredible dependence on daily ritual.
Politics would likely revolve around trying to impress those people in power without upsetting others, and without building too many rivalries. A single solid gesture could net a high office, a single panegyric could gather a senatorial post but conversely calamitous falls could occur. The death of an emperor could sweep away all the old favourites (usually via execution).
At the lower-levels, the PCs would be mainly interested in getting a solid and reliable patron and then trying to advance with his help, without becoming too reliant upon him. Through the middle-levels, the PCs will have to look both ways: both at seeking advancement and gaining more influential patrons, yet looking over their shoulder to prevent ambitious climbers from toppling them. At the higher-levels, the PCs may deal with the Imperial Court directly, and would be more interested in gathering clients to propagate their power. Just a few ideas.
Mathew_Freeman
Adventurer
I'd like to nominate this thread for archiving, I think. This is great advice. I've been wondering how to get into politics in a higher level campaign I'm in...and this is wonderful.
Similar Threads
